Network Schools – Wayne Gerseny to https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/04/03/magazine/thomas-piketty-interview u w B l.html?h I’ll smid=url-share the Is for

Our local paper this morning has a front page AP article by Mark Sherman on the SCOTUS decision that supports the right of a PA ninth grade student who “expressed her disappointment over not making the varsity cheerleading team with a string of curse words and a raised middle finger on Snapchat.” The SCOTUS decided that since the incident occurred outside of school the school could not punish her by suspending her from the cheerleading squad for a year. 

From my perspective, the absolute worst part of the ruling is spelled out in this part of the article:

The justices did not foreclose schools from disciplining students for what they say off campus, though they did not spell out when schools could act. An earlier federal appeals court ruling in this case would have barred public schools from punishing off-campus speech. Despite ruling in Levy’s favor, Breyer wrote that “we do not believe the special characteristics that give schools additional license to regulate student speech always disappear when a school regulates speech that takes place off campus. The school’s regulatory interests remain significant in some off-campus circumstances.”

As one who worked as a high school disciplinarian in two schools and Superintendent in five districts the lack of clarity in this decision is maddening! Saying that “school’s regulatory interests remain significant in some off-campus circumstances”  is not at all helpful to those who must make decisions ON campus! Here is a short “what about” list that comes to mind:

• What about online bullying that happens after school hours?
• What about pictures posted of students whose conduct violates athletic training?
• What about videos posted of students who are using directed profanity toward a coach, teacher, administrator, or classmate? 
• What about pictures of students posing with Nazi regalia? BLM flags? LGBTQ flags? Confederate flags?
• What about pictures of students posing with AK-47s? Drug paraphernalia? Alcohol?

And in each of these circumstances when some unlucky administrator takes disciplinary action against a student whose parent who decides that their child’s freedom of speech has been violated, their Superintendent and ultimately their local board will spend hours determining if the action was justified… and the media coverage will be persistent and glaring… and the community will be divided in unimaginable ways. 

The weeks and months ahead promise to be a bonanza for school lawyers as they provide guidance to schools on how to craft their policies and regulations to take this new ruling into account…. and try to figure out what regulatory interests remain significant in some off-campus circumstances.